Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To present the complex issues of the impact of spinal cord injury (SCI) in sport, with a specific focus on autonomic dysreflexia (AD) and the potential debilitating effects of unstable blood pressure control among athletes. DATA SOURCES AND METHODS: A literature review based on a key word electronic literature search of articles, practice guidelines, and review articles pertaining to AD was conducted using MEDLINE, SportDiscus, and EMBASE. RESULTS: Spinal cord injury results not only in devastating paralysis; it also commonly is associated with a range of autonomic dysregulation that can interfere with cardiovascular, bladder, bowel, temperature, and sexual function. Individuals with a cervical or high-thoracic SCI face lifelong abnormalities in systemic arterial pressure control. In general, their resting arterial pressure is lower than that in able-bodied individuals and is commonly associated with persistent orthostatic intolerance. In addition, they experience transient episodes of life-threatening hypertension, known as "AD," which often is associated with disturbances in heart rate and rhythm. Autonomic dysreflexia occurs in up to 90% of individuals with a cervical or high-thoracic SCI and requires prompt intervention. It also is known that, during athletic activities, self-induced AD is used by some individuals to improve their performance, a technique known as "boosting." For health safety reasons, boosting is officially banned by the International Paralympic Committee. CONCLUSIONS: Devastating paralysis, a variety of autonomic dysfunctions, and abnormal cardiovascular control after SCI present significant challenges in terms of individuals remaining active in competitive sports. Medical practitioners who are involved in the care of wheelchair athletes should be aware of the unique cardiovascular dysfunction that results from SCI and may occur at any time, even with seemingly innocuous triggers. Prompt recognition and appropriate management of these conditions, including episodes of AD, could be life saving.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".